According to Dr. Choi Anna, she and her fellow doctor, Shim Sang-duk, basically sold thier souls for $340 dollars.
“We sold our soul for money,” Choi said, according to The Times. “Abortion was an easy way to make money.” How much money you ask? According to them, they were performing about 30 abortions a month – twice the number of babies born at their clinic.
“Officially, South Korea prohibits abortion except when the mother’s health is seriously threatened or in cases of severe genetic problems, rape or incest, according to The Times. Abortion is always illegal beyond 24 weeks into a pregnancy. Researchers have estimated only about 4 percent of the approximately 340,000 abortions in 2005 were performed for legal reasons, The Times reported.” According to one survey - half the women between the ages of 15 and 44 have had abortions.
There are many reasons that these abortions have been silently condoned. A mother who gave birth to a son was alleged to have yelled, “One son is worth ten daughters” indicating the preference for male children who would not only carry on the family name but also provide financial security to their parents in their twilight years. But this practice may have contributed, at least in part, to the increased foreign brides bought and brought in to the country for all those single men and the occasional – less than pleasant experience here and here and here. Also the rather narrow preferences for certain types of women.
Some of the blame lies upon Park Chung-hee and his zealous efforts to industrialize Korea. If you remember my blog entitled “the unkind cut in the 1980s” (but not this unkind cut) you will see that some Koreans were sterilized – encouraged to go under the knife for the good of the country.
Of course some of the blame falls upon the younger generation and their wanting more freedom and financial security. Raising children in Korea – especially with the cost of education, both public and private, soaring – must seem extremely daunting. It is any wonder why Korea’s birthrate is one of the lowest in the world – even with the occasional perks of workers being sent home early for a little love making.
Is it any wonder that the birthrate has dropped to one of the lowest in the world?
{ 43 comments… read them below or add one }
Among the reasons cited for tolerating illegal abortions, you forgot one very big reason: terminating an unwanted pregnancy because the woman does not wish to have a child. In both Korea and Japan, condoms have long been the main form of pregnancy avoidance. American women have so many choices from different pills to the IUD to a new minimally invasive surgery that prevents pregnancy by scarring the fallopian tubes.
Doctors Anna Choi and Shim Sang-duk may have been motivated by money, but I am glad that there are doctors in Korea willing to provide abortions in violation of the law. I had a pregnancy scare my second month in Korea, when I missed two periods in a row. I was reliable about taking the pill and required my partner to wear a condom, so I couldn’t have been more careful about avoiding pregnancy and STDs. As my cycles have always been regular, I was terrified that I was pregnant and sought help from an American colleague, who lent me a home pregnancy test and assured me she would find me an abortion provider if needed. Fortunately, the test was negative. The stress of starting a new life in a foreign country probably caused the irregularity. The same thing happened when I returned to the US. My experience in Korea affirmed my pro-choice stance.
Sonagi you don’t even need a prescription to get birth control pills in Korea. You just walk in the pharmacy and say you need them. They may ask if you’ve taken them before, but if you say yes that’s all they need to hear.
Many conversations that I have had with younger, well-educated Korean women and their mothers give me the same message as “Sonagi” has outlined above. Many do not want to get pregnant — especially if they are single — and wish to enjoy living their own lives now, without the mandatory marriage plus baby path.
I remember one mother confiding in me she had hoped that both her daughters would marry a doctor but both of them *became* doctors, with no time to find a man because they are so busy working and are tired on the weekend!
Neff, this is a can or worms. Well done.
Jeebus woman!! At least have the decency to sound a TMI alert!
I agree with Sonagi.
Fact is, if it weren’t for doctors who perform abortions, women would be dying from botched backalley abortions and/or the unsanitary conditons they were conducted.
PS. No form of birth control is 100% effective (you can’t seriously suggest abstinence to someone married like me).
Besides, the world is already over populated and South Korea remains one of the most densily populated countries in the world. One child per couple is clearly more than enough nowadays.
#6,
…”in which they were conducted”…
As far as abortion goes, it all comes down to whether a fetus is human and thus worthy of societal protection before birth or whether you believe that the magical transformation from nonhuman to human occurs sometime during the passage from the womb to the cradle. Once we start debating about drawing lines between what constitutes human life and what doesn’t, it’s a slippery slope towards the devaluation of all human life. (“Frankly officer, I thought he was better off dead!)
Several of my Korean friends, some of whom have had abortions, take the paradoxical stance that, yes, abortion is the taking of a human life, but having the baby would have really messed up my life, (either through defect or inconvenience) so it couldn’t be helped. Doctors reinforce this idea by offering or even recommending an abortion at the slightest excuse. One friend of mine even had an abortion because she had taken cold medication before she found out she was pregnant.
My wife found out that she had appendicitis and a pregnancy on the same day. The first two doctors we went to wouldn’t attempt an appendectomy without first performing an abortion. A quick internet search found that an appendectomy during pregnancy in the US offers less than a 5% risk to the fetus, so we drove an hour to the nearest larger city and kept looking. Finally, at the fourth hospital we visited, we found a sympathetic surgeon who performed the operation with an epidural rather than general anesthetic. Even so, we worried that something might have happened to our baby, but 8 months later, she was born strong and healthy. Now looking at my beautiful daughter 4 years later, I wonder how many millions of boys and girls in Korea have been denied a chance at life simply because they could not be guaranteed to be “perfect.”
#9,
“Once we start debating about drawing lines between what constitutes human life and what doesn’t, it’s a slippery slope towards the devaluation of all human life. (“Frankly officer, I thought he was better off dead!)”
Ironically, that’s a slippery slope argument.
I don’t think anybody in their right mind feels totaly comfy with the notion of abortion but i suspect it is a necessary evil…this situation reminds me of my own country back in the 70′s before we legalised abortion. I think Korea should probably throw in the towel and provide some kind of legalisation, they might find out the number of abortions might actually decrease…340k is indeed a very high number for a country with a 50 million population
Carrying capacity is the relevant factor here, not population density.
#12,
South Korea doesn’t produce enough food to meet the demands of its population.
An appeal to tradition, our Western pagan tradition:
“I SWEAR by Apollo the physician, AEsculapius, and Health, and All-heal, and all the gods and goddesses, that, according to my ability and judgement, I will keep this Oath and this stipulation…. I will not give a woman a pessary to produce abortion.” — The Hippocratic Oath.
The modern version required doctors to “reject abortion that deliberately takes a unique human life.” Religion? No. Science — Pro-Abortion Is Anti-Science.
#13,
South Korea isn’t an autarky.
#14,
You conveniently forget to mention some very important details. That line was most probably added to the oath because women in those days would insert all kinds of disgusting substances into their womb to prevent pregnancy (it was believe that the uterus was a separate entity, so foul smelling substances were inserted to push the uterus away from the sperm and sweet smelling substances were inserted to attract it to the sperm). The contraceptive pessaries used in those days were anything from a wool plug to a tube filled with mutton fat. Clearly, these things must have caused serious infections, often leading to death. That is most probably why it was added to the oath (after all, it speaks of not administering poisons to patients in the same line). So, it isn’t anti-abortion, or at least not as you interpret it to be.
#13,
No, it’s a net importer of food.
…#14,
Forgot to mention: abortion was legal in ancient Greece when the oath was written. Note that the oath makes no mention of ingesting abortifacients, the most common way to induce abortions at that time (Cyrene’s economy was based on the production of silphium, a popular abortifacient).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortifacient#History
I am so glad for those children who were not aborted, but put up for adoption, even by American families and others who desperately want a child.
Legally, there is nothing magical about the fact that birth physiologically separates the baby from its mother. Those who believe in an eternal soul must reconcile this belief with the process of conception, gestation, and birth and with their views on abortion.
Abortion laws and practices vary widely across the world. Proving a causal link between the legalization or tolerance of abortion and a subsequent devaluing of human life would be extremely difficult. Abortion was legalized in the US and many other countries out of concern for the lives of girls and women. China, on the other hand, uses forced abortions to limit population growth. Islamic regimes outlaw abortion altogether yet hang and stone publicly people accused of having sex outside of marriage. Societies regulate abortion in different ways for different reasons.
#17,
So is New York City. New York City “produces” enough food to meet the demands of its population not by farming Central Park, but by producing economic value and exchanging it for net imports of food.
I for one feel comforted in learning about Sonagi’s prior experiences with sperm in her uterus and fear of impregnation by it, j/k.
Shouts “you go girl” from the stands.
Ok not really, but you gotta give it to her for not caring what anyone here would think of her for contemplating aborting her child. It happens more often than we think from women of all spectrums. Half the people here may have mothers who aborted their potential siblings at some point in their lives.
I find it funny how Koreans think of sex before marriage as ‘bad’ yet find abortion ‘good’.
Also, I wonder why people think scraping a baby out of the uterus against nature is any better than supporting abstinence…
You know, it’s a bit odd that some people here are talking about ‘the fetus’, while others are talking about ‘how to feed us’. I think the thread’s gonna converge when they finally get to Solient Green.
Abortions + Korea is reminding of that scene in the 퇴마록 fantasy novels where the main characters have to fight against a aggregation of spiritual beings composed of thousands of aborted fetuses who are out for revenge against korean society, if I remember correctly. I think I had some nightmares about that later on…
“Also, I wonder why people think scraping a baby out of the uterus against nature is any better than supporting abstinence…”
[sigh] The question isn’t whether or not there will be abortions. Nor is the issue whether society will “allow” premarital and extramarital sex. The issue is whether these things will be safe or else life-threateningly dangerous for the women and girls involved.
Korea has the lowest birthrate in the world, except for HongKong. It is no coincidence that abortions are coming under attack. But as long as Koreans continue to treat “fatherless” children as outcasts, women will simply be forced to go to elsewhere (Japan?) for the medical care they are denied at home.
Wasn’t Korea trying to become a medical hub?
Society has “disallowed” premarital and extramarital sex and abortions in the past, and there’s no reason why it can’t or won’t again in the future. Safety is the sole “issue” only when you’ve successfully propagated or imposed the idea that abortion is an inalienable right.
“But as long as Koreans continue to treat “fatherless” children as outcasts, women will simply be forced to go to elsewhere (Japan?) for the medical care they are denied at home.”
I think you have it exactly backwards. It’s more on point to say: “As long as Koreans continue to permit de facto abortion on demand, those born fatherless will continue to be treated as outcasts, their humanity denied just as the humanity of the unborn children is denied in their home in the womb.”
Let’s be honest, here: Special circumstances aside, abortion is not medical care. Not for the mother (pregnancy is not a disease) and certainly not for the child.
“Korea has the lowest birthrate in the world, except for HongKong. It is no coincidence that abortions are coming under attack.”
Nah, I think it’s because Korean Christian groups are heavily influenced by American fundamentalism/ists.
I have Korean girlfriends married to Korean men who had an abortion. A lot of young Korean women who are married and have a comfortable standard of living still don’t want to have children. Ironically one of them became a strong christian soon afterwards.
WeikuBoy: “[sigh] The question isn’t whether or not there will be abortions. Nor is the issue whether society will “allow” premarital and extramarital sex. The issue is whether these things will be safe or else life-threateningly dangerous for the women and girls involved.”
This all sounds so pragmatic and righteous [let's utter a sigh of modern enlightenment], but it ignores the fact that abortion not only threatens the life of girls but in fact directly causes the death of baby girls. The females in the womb are genetically human, not monkeys, not alien invaders, not inhuman blogs of tissue.
If you think you have a good reason to kill them, then say so forthrightly. But stop pretending that abortion doesn’t kill humans. It does.
“If you think you have a good reason to kill them, then say so forthrightly. But stop pretending that abortion doesn’t kill humans.”
No, it doesn’t. Jesus; you’re really an attorney? At law? Yet you sneer at “modern enlightenment”? Are you in or from the U.S.? Go re-read Roe v. Wade. What “law school” did you attend, by the way?
“abortion is not medical care”
Not if you and people like you — men, almost invariably — have their way. But they will still happen. Just as will premarital sex. No matter how successful you are in keeping sex education out of the schools.
Riddle me this, Batman: if abortion is murder, then what penalties will you seek to impose, if and when abortions are re-criminalized? Will the woman go to prison? The doctor? For how many years? Please tell me.
If you were a doctor and not a lawyer, you’d know that not all medical care involves disease treatment.
Up until about the 12th week of gestation, there are no baby boys or baby girls; there are growing and developing human fetuses physiologically bound inside their mothers.
“Up until about the 12th week of gestation, there are no baby boys or baby girls; there are growing and developing human fetuses physiologically bound inside their mothers.”
Here is a 12-week pre-born small child (the literal meaning of ‘fetus’): http://www.kittymom.net/jessica/images/fetus12weeks.jpg
This 12-week pre-born doesn’t appear to be any more ‘physiologically bound’ than a baby at 13 weeks or 25 weeks or later; they all have their own bodies but also require placentas to receive nourishment from their mother. So the relevance of the second part of your sentence is unclear.
As for the first part of the sentence, it is simply wrong. Pre-borns at 12 weeks are either male or female, either boys or girls: sex is genetic (going back to the zygote) not physiological. That’s why a boy who loses his male organ due to some accident is still a boy, not a girl or an it.
“If you were a doctor and not a lawyer, you’d know that not all medical care involves disease treatment.”
I do understand this point. I should have communicated more clearly. I’ll clarify now. You are correct that medical care is not just about disease treatment but, more broadly, about the health of the patient. Absent special circumstances (as I already qualified), it is more healthy for a pregnant woman to give birth than to have an abortion. Not only is their the risk of the abortion itself causing a life-threatening complication to the mother, but also even without such complication, abortions significantly increase a woman’s risk of breast cancer. It also kills the baby in the womb.
In other words, special circumstances aside, abortion is not a health care procedure — it’s a health threatening procedure.
The placenta itself physiologically binds the baby to the mother. It’s not just a baby sack. It is metabolically active tissue that interacts with the rest of the mother’s body.
So being a male or a female is simply a matter of genes and not hormones? Have you never heard of intersexuality or hermaphrodites?
Can you back that up with statistics showing that women who undergo abortions are more likely to experience complications than women who continue their pregnancies?
“Not if you and people like you — men, almost invariably — have their way.”
Good one…I was thinking the same thing. Why is it that those who want to prevent women from having full control over their bodies are generally male and almost always believers in a paternalistic religion?
…or rather, followers of a paternalistic faith.
By paternalistic faith do you mean something like Christianity? Isn’t a major component of paternalistic faiths like Christianity the universalizing of particular cultural norms and laws?
#41,
Ever heard of the separation of church and state?
The separation of church and state, or a women’s right to an abortion, are particular norms. By universalizing these particular norms or promoting the universalization of them, you’re not acting any differently than the “followers of a paternalistic faith.”
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 2 trackbacks }